What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5029469 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5029469?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5029469?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5029469?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11490405-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

What was Tenancy Tribunal case 5029469 about?

The tribunal order states: An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal

How much money was awarded in case 5029469?

Verified claim lines are listed on this page.

What type of tenancy dispute was case 5029469?

The dispute type was not classified.

Where can I read the official tribunal order for case 5029469?

The official Ministry of Justice published order is available at https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/TTV2/PDF/11490405-Tribunal_Order_Redacted.pdf.

New Zealand Tenancy Tribunal Case 5029469 — Tenancy dispute

Order

An application for suppression has been made in this case, and the Tribunal orders suppression of the tenants’ names and identifying details.
The application is dismissed.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing, which was conducted via teleconference.
This tenancy began on 23 March 2018.
The landlord has filed an application claiming the tenants breached their obligation to mow the lawn and tidy the garden, in accordance with their tenancy agreement. Legal framework
In this jurisdiction, the party making the claim has the onus of proving their claim to the required civil standard of proof, which is on the balance of probabilities. This means they must establish, with evidence, that their claim is “more likely than not.”
The Tribunal can award compensation where a party has been in breach of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA) or has been in breach of the tenancy agreement, and the other party has suffered a loss because of that breach. In general, when awarding compensation, the accepted principle is that the injured party should be put in the same position as they would have been but for the breach, since there is liability for losses flowing from the breach.
During the tenancy, the tenant’s obligation is to keep the premises in a reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition. This is set out in section 40 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA). A reasonably tidy garden is to the standard an average, reasonable bystander considers tidy, not perfect or prizewinning. 1 Analysis
In this case, the tenancy agreement requires that the tenants are to maintain the lawn and garden, including disposal of vegetation. Having considered the evidence and submissions of both parties, I find that the landlord has been unable to establish, with sufficient evidence, that the tenants have failed in their obligation to mow the lawn and tidy the garden.
The landlord has provided a copy of a 14-day notice issued to the tenants on 22 August 2024. The landlord does not accept that the lawn and garden was in a reasonably tidy condition. However, there has been no photographic evidence to show the condition of the garden at the relevant time, when the inspection was carried out. The landlord also accepts there has been no recent inspection of the premises.
On the other hand, the tenants have provided oral evidence at the hearing that they had attended to the lawns and garden, following the mediation. The tenant explained the reasons why he did not mow the lawn or maintain the garden for a period of time. He states this has since been remedied and he carried out the work himself. The tenant maintains they have looked after the property, keeping the house clean and tidy.
As noted earlier, the party making the claim has the onus of proving their claim, on the balance of probabilities. To do so, they must provide evidence in support. As the landlord has not been able to prove their claim, with sufficient evidence, the application is dismissed. 1 Residential Tenancy Law in New Zealand by S. Benson, at 6.12, and Housing New Zealand v Holloway TT Auckland TT215/93, 8 February 1993 Name suppression
The tenants seek name suppression, which is granted, in view of the landlord being unsuccessful with the application. The landlord does not seek name suppression. Filing fee
The filing fee will not be reimbursed since the application has not been successful.

Reasons

Both parties attended the hearing, which was conducted via teleconference.

This tenancy began on 23 March 2018.

The landlord has filed an application claiming the tenants breached their obligation to mow the lawn and tidy the garden, in accordance with their tenancy agreement. Legal framework

In this jurisdiction, the party making the claim has the onus of proving their claim to the required civil standard of proof, which is on the balance of probabilities. This means they must establish, with evidence, that their claim is “more likely than not.”

The Tribunal can award compensation where a party has been in breach of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA) or has been in breach of the tenancy agreement, and the other party has suffered a loss because of that breach. In general, when awarding compensation, the accepted principle is that the injured party should be put in the same position as they would have been but for the breach, since there is liability for losses flowing from the breach.

During the tenancy, the tenant’s obligation is to keep the premises in a reasonably clean and reasonably tidy condition. This is set out in section 40 of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986 (the RTA). A reasonably tidy garden is to the standard an average, reasonable bystander considers tidy, not perfect or prizewinning. 1 Analysis

In this case, the tenancy agreement requires that the tenants are to maintain the lawn and garden, including disposal of vegetation. Having considered the evidence and submissions of both parties, I find that the landlord has been unable to establish, with sufficient evidence, that the tenants have failed in their obligation to mow the lawn and tidy the garden.

The landlord has provided a copy of a 14-day notice issued to the tenants on 22 August 2024. The landlord does not accept that the lawn and garden was in a reasonably tidy condition. However, there has been no photographic evidence to show the condition of the garden at the relevant time, when the inspection was carried out. The landlord also accepts there has been no recent inspection of the premises.

On the other hand, the tenants have provided oral evidence at the hearing that they had attended to the lawns and garden, following the mediation. The tenant explained the reasons why he did not mow the lawn or maintain the garden for a period of time. He states this has since been remedied and he carried out the work himself. The tenant maintains they have looked after the property, keeping the house clean and tidy.

As noted earlier, the party making the claim has the onus of proving their claim, on the balance of probabilities. To do so, they must provide evidence in support. As the landlord has not been able to prove their claim, with sufficient evidence, the application is dismissed. 1 Residential Tenancy Law in New Zealand by S. Benson, at 6.12, and Housing New Zealand v Holloway TT Auckland TT215/93, 8 February 1993 Name suppression

The tenants seek name suppression, which is granted, in view of the landlord being unsuccessful with the application. The landlord does not seek name suppression. Filing fee

The filing fee will not be reimbursed since the application has not been successful.

Tenancy Tribunal case 5029469 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Claims & awards

Tenancy Tribunal case 5029469 — Tenancy dispute

At a glance

Claims & awards

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions

Order

Reasons

Topics & place

Residential Tenancies Act sections

Frequently asked questions